व्यवहारमयूख (नीलकण्ठ भट्ट - पश्चिमी भारत की हिन्दू न्याय-संहिता एवं व्यवहार कोष)

'INTRODUCTION' xiii

is assigned to the Vyavahāramayūkha.¹ The Vyavahāramayūkha is of para-
mount authority in Gujerat, the town and island of Bombay and in northern
Konkan.² Though the pre-eminence of the Mitākṣarā in the Maratha
country is acknowledged, yet in a few instances its doctrines have been either
set aside or modified in favour of the views propounded by the Vyavahāra-
mayūkha. For instance, though the Mitākṣarā nowhere expressly recognizes
the sister as a gotraja sapiṇḍa, the courts, following the Mayūkha, have
assigned to her a very high place as an heir even in the Maratha country
and in Ratnagiri It is a well-established rule of the Bombay High Court
that where the Mitākṣarā is either silent or obscure the aid of the Vyava-
hāramayūkha must be invoked for its interpretation and the principle of
interpretation is to harmonize both works wherever and so far as that is
reasonably possible ³ It is instructive to see how the Vyavahāramayūkha
came to be recognised as the leading authority in Gujerat in matters of Hindu
Law It has been stated above that the family of Nīlakaṇṭha came from
Paithan in the Deccan. Naturally all the learned members of this family,
though they wrote in Benares or elsewhere, preferred the usages of the
Deccan and Śaṅkarabhaṭṭa, the father of Nīlakaṇṭha, says in his Dvaita-
nirṇaya that he will abide by the views of Deccan writers Therefore the
works of the Bhaṭṭas of Benares were highly esteemed by the learned men
of the Maratha Country That the Mayūkhas of Nīlakaṇṭha were eagerly
sought for even as far to the south as Belgaum in the times of the Peshwas
is established by a letter of Naro Vinayak, Mamlatdar of Athni in the pre-
sent Belgaum District, dated 28th June 1797⁴, where reference is made to
the copying of the six Mayūkhas on saṃskāra, ācāra, samaya, śrāddha, nīti
and vyavahāra and a request is made that the other six Mayūkhas might
be sent for a copy being made When the Marathas held sway over Gujerat
in the 18th century, the works of Kamalākara ( particularly the Nirṇaya-
sindhu ) and of Nīlakaṇṭha were relied upon by the śāstris at the court of
the Maratha rulers of Gujerat⁵ Thus the Vyavahāramayūkha had come to be
recognised as a work of paramount authority in Gujerat at the time of the
advent of the British in the first decades of the 19th century. It appears that
even in Northern India the Vyavahāramayūkha was referred to by the British

---

1. Vide Rakhmabai v Radhabai 5 Bom H C R ( A. C J. ) 181 at p 185, Narayan
   v Nana 7 Bom. H C. R ( A C J ) 153 at p 169, Krishnaji v Pandurang 12 Bom. H C. R.
   65, at pp. 67 — 68, Jankibai v Sundra 14 Bom. 612 at p 616 ( a case from Ratnagiri ).
2. Lallubhai v Mankuvarbai 2 Bom 388 at p 418, Jankibai v Sundra 14 Bom 612 at
   pp 623 — 624, Vyas Chimanlal v Vyas Ramchandra 24 Bom 367 ( F B ) at p 373.
   3 Gojabai v Shrimant Shahajirao 17 Bom 114 at 118, Bai Kesserbai v Hunsraj 30
   Bom 431, 442 ( P C, ), Bhagwan v Warubai 32 Bom 300 at p 312
3. Vide Introduction to the edition of the text of the Vyavahāramayūkha p. XLIII n 1
   ( Bhandarkar Institute ) where the letter is set out in full.
4. Vide Lallubhai v. Mankuvarbai 2 Bom 388, pp 418 — 419 and Bhagirithibai v. Kahnu-
   jirao 11 Bom 285 ( F. B ) at pp 294 — 295 for the reasons of the pre-eminent position of
   the Vyavahāramayūkha in Gujerat and in Bombay island.